I agree. And while we are at it, work on getting the legislature to ban O/G companies from causing the earthquakes in the first place.
I agree. And while we are at it, work on getting the legislature to ban O/G companies from causing the earthquakes in the first place.
David Boren says Hamm was only trying to be helpful...
http://www.tulsaworld.com/earthquak...cle_a7df8a5c-47f7-540c-af46-faa04765bc5c.html
http://www.tulsaworld.com/earthquak...cle_a7df8a5c-47f7-540c-af46-faa04765bc5c.html
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,168
- Reaction score
- 46
Simple geophysics state that hydraulic fracturing can only induce microseismicity. This is seismic activity that neither you nor I can even feel. The issue is from water injection. Now, you have people that like to link water injection directly to, and exclusively to hydraulic fracturing. This is not the case. If you want to approach this scientifically, get data. Go to the corporation commission and get details about the injection wells. If you want an example... the Prague swarm. Wells associated with this swarm, while they are certainly waste water injection wells, they are hardly waste water from hydraulic fracturing. The majority of We from these wells are waste water residuals from conventional wells.
Beyond that, I side (regardless of my chosen moniker showing my obvious affiliation) with the oil companies, including that rat bastard, dog of a destructor Harold Hamm. Why? Because the science isn't vetted. If you knew how much unknowns there are when it comes to geology, my slant wouldn't even be in question.
It is reasonable, any time there is damage to personal property, that people want to jump on the first target that seems to be the most plausible cause. And when there is hesitancy, people want to immediately assume "They done been bought out by big oil." This is simply not the case. OGS hasn't been bought out by big oil. And any of you can go sit in on a course lecture going on at the Mewbourne School of Earth and Energy and hear professor speculate as to what process involved in drilling, completion or otherwise that might be causing these earthquakes and find that the speculation by staff does not quite mesh with your conspiracy.
It does not benefit energy producers to lie. When they lie, as in the past, they get caught. Credibility is a big player it today's energy business. There are reason's why sites such as Petro-wiki exist. It is to get information out to the "little guy." You would be hard-pressed to find any credible energy representative that comes out and says "THIS IS NOT OUR PROBLEM." Why? Because that just doesn't wash well when you are facing a large amount of class action lawsuits.
Beyond that, I side (regardless of my chosen moniker showing my obvious affiliation) with the oil companies, including that rat bastard, dog of a destructor Harold Hamm. Why? Because the science isn't vetted. If you knew how much unknowns there are when it comes to geology, my slant wouldn't even be in question.
It is reasonable, any time there is damage to personal property, that people want to jump on the first target that seems to be the most plausible cause. And when there is hesitancy, people want to immediately assume "They done been bought out by big oil." This is simply not the case. OGS hasn't been bought out by big oil. And any of you can go sit in on a course lecture going on at the Mewbourne School of Earth and Energy and hear professor speculate as to what process involved in drilling, completion or otherwise that might be causing these earthquakes and find that the speculation by staff does not quite mesh with your conspiracy.
It does not benefit energy producers to lie. When they lie, as in the past, they get caught. Credibility is a big player it today's energy business. There are reason's why sites such as Petro-wiki exist. It is to get information out to the "little guy." You would be hard-pressed to find any credible energy representative that comes out and says "THIS IS NOT OUR PROBLEM." Why? Because that just doesn't wash well when you are facing a large amount of class action lawsuits.
Milkshake, how's about Hamm and Stark intervention in the findings of the OGS?
I bet you're on board with that too.
How does a normal citizen get an audience with Boren and Holland?
I bet you're on board with that too.
How does a normal citizen get an audience with Boren and Holland?
Last edited:
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, multiquote coming below. 
First things, just because this always seems to come up even though it has no relevance to the conversation: the use of the word "fracking" is a well understood term in common usage to name the process of hydraulic fracturing. It is a moniker of the abbreviation "frac" whose orthography is properly represented by the addition of the K to the ending. In a common example, if one were to search Google for the term "fracking" they would find the majority of references to be related to the process of hydraulic fracturing with an smaller number of references to the term used in a popular television program as an acceptable replacement for another word not permissible for general broadcast. The two uses of the word are not interchangeable and do not create confusion in common language. As such, the word "frack" is understood to mean hydraulic fracturing and is thus an appropriate term to use in casual conversation.
I've heard the "it's not fracking, it's disposal wells" from a lot of O/G pundits and it's always facinated me. Basically it says, it's not fracking, waste disposal. There are a couple of issues. No body cares if an O/G company causes an earthquake because they are fracking, disposing of toxic waste products resulting from fracking, or drilling a hole to China, the net result is O/G company activity is causing earthquakes. Don't cause earthquakes.
You mention science and reference "simple geophysics" which implys that you have knowledge and/or education in the application of physical processes to geological structures. This is good because I have a lot of questions. But let's focus on the science part for a moment. I think most will agree that science is a function of observation, experimentation, detection of patterns, and so on. Since it's beyond the scope of individuals (at least those of us who are not billionaire O/G executives) to experiment at scale with geological formations, we rely on the one thing that makes humans unique on this planet, and that is our skill for pattern recognition and apply it to the experiments already performed which is the o/g wells we already have and the data we have observed. So lets go with patterns since we are keeping things simple. Below is a graph representing the macroseismicity in the state of Oklahoma since 1978.
[Broken External Image]
That here we see a pattern of seismicity is unprecidented. There are no natural dynamic forces previously causing earthquakes in this area so that leads us to look for other things that can make the earth move outside of purely simple geological forces. Did an astreroid hit us in central Oklahoma? None that I am aware of. Has the US Government started underground nuclear testing in Oklahoma? Could be with our latest tensions with Russia so we can't rule this one out. Has any other action that is not typical of natural geological processes begun within the pattern of time we evidenced above? I can only think of one for sure, fracking and if you must, the waste wells disposing of products generated by, fracking. If I approach this scientifically and get data, what I see is a tight coupling between the large scale introduction of fracking and the unprecidented increase in siesmic activity.
So we have established a tight corrolation in time deltas between increased fracking usage and increased siesmicity. We all know that waste injection wells have been around for a while but we haven't had all these earthquakes for that long so what else is there? As it turns out, there isn't a huge difference between a fracked well and a disposal well as far as the structure of the ground beneigh us is concerned. Both push huge volumes of a chemical/water mixture underground at high pressure. In a fracked well, you want to break up that structure and is a disposal well, you don't really care either way so long as the waste goes away. As a matter of fact, both are considered to be the same "class" of well (class II). So lets look at a map of class II wells and see if there is any corolation between the locations of these class II wells and areas seeing this significant increase in earthquakes.
Earthquakes
[Broken External Image]
Wells
Again, one can see a pattern not only in time but in location between the increase of fracking activity and the increase in seismicity.
So you say that "simple geophysics" precludes the idea of fracking induced earthquakes but go on to imply that geology is a complex matter that if we all understood, we would know that fracking didn't cause earthquakes. So there is a bit of a contradiction there. I agree with you that geology is a complex matter that isn't well understood but the simple corolation between increases in fracking and increases in earthquakes is much more clear.
That sounds good except when the prinicple himself says that he is under great pressure from the o/g industry. Professors postulating in the classroom is far different from the industry's perspective than them leading protests at the state capital.
It absolutely benefits them to lie when the truth hurts profits. There is a calculated risk. If I admit that my product is hurting people, then I have a 100% probability of loosing that business. If I lie, redirect, or downplay the significance of my harm, I have a much higher probability of maintaining profitablility. This is not a new thing, tobacco pulled it off for half a century. The oil industry pulled it off for a while in the face of overwhelming evidence that leaded gas was causing health problems. Their calculation is that with enough propaganda and lobbying, they can maintain their profitability from the highly effective process of fracking for decades. When they lawsuits come, they fold the company up into a spinoff, wash their hands, and count their dough (ref Kerr Mcgee/Anadarko).
"THIS IS NOT OUR PROBLEM" is exactly what their saying. And it's easy. They don't have to counter the facts tit for tat. They don't even have to present facts. All the industry has to do is attempt discredit the facts. There is an entire industry of spin doctors and lobbys whose purpose is to present counter arguements, fact-based or otherwise. In that industry, there is a euphemism called F.U.D. That stands for Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. These tools are employed by the o/g industry massively.
Fear - The big government is going to take away our freedoms because they are interfering with our business and damn it, that is unAmerican.
Uncertainty - If we don't keep producing at any cost, the Arabs are going to take over our energy supplies and you will be forced to stand in long lines for gas, drive 55, and be subjected to paying whatever prices they dictate.
Doubt - This science is unvetted. We don't really know what is causing earthquakes. Simple geophysics says that fracking couldn't be responsible but because it's a complex issue, we need more time for the science to develop. While that happens, we will continue our activities.
Credibility and truthfullness have nothing to do with each other. Simple way to split the two is to follow the money. A geologist isn't going to make a or loose another billion regardless of the findings of his research. But the o/g industry will. They can hedge by drawing out the debate for decades while they continue to make huge profits and they are vested in doing so.
First things, just because this always seems to come up even though it has no relevance to the conversation: the use of the word "fracking" is a well understood term in common usage to name the process of hydraulic fracturing. It is a moniker of the abbreviation "frac" whose orthography is properly represented by the addition of the K to the ending. In a common example, if one were to search Google for the term "fracking" they would find the majority of references to be related to the process of hydraulic fracturing with an smaller number of references to the term used in a popular television program as an acceptable replacement for another word not permissible for general broadcast. The two uses of the word are not interchangeable and do not create confusion in common language. As such, the word "frack" is understood to mean hydraulic fracturing and is thus an appropriate term to use in casual conversation. I've heard the "it's not fracking, it's disposal wells" from a lot of O/G pundits and it's always facinated me. Basically it says, it's not fracking, waste disposal. There are a couple of issues. No body cares if an O/G company causes an earthquake because they are fracking, disposing of toxic waste products resulting from fracking, or drilling a hole to China, the net result is O/G company activity is causing earthquakes. Don't cause earthquakes.
You mention science and reference "simple geophysics" which implys that you have knowledge and/or education in the application of physical processes to geological structures. This is good because I have a lot of questions. But let's focus on the science part for a moment. I think most will agree that science is a function of observation, experimentation, detection of patterns, and so on. Since it's beyond the scope of individuals (at least those of us who are not billionaire O/G executives) to experiment at scale with geological formations, we rely on the one thing that makes humans unique on this planet, and that is our skill for pattern recognition and apply it to the experiments already performed which is the o/g wells we already have and the data we have observed. So lets go with patterns since we are keeping things simple. Below is a graph representing the macroseismicity in the state of Oklahoma since 1978.
[Broken External Image]
That here we see a pattern of seismicity is unprecidented. There are no natural dynamic forces previously causing earthquakes in this area so that leads us to look for other things that can make the earth move outside of purely simple geological forces. Did an astreroid hit us in central Oklahoma? None that I am aware of. Has the US Government started underground nuclear testing in Oklahoma? Could be with our latest tensions with Russia so we can't rule this one out. Has any other action that is not typical of natural geological processes begun within the pattern of time we evidenced above? I can only think of one for sure, fracking and if you must, the waste wells disposing of products generated by, fracking. If I approach this scientifically and get data, what I see is a tight coupling between the large scale introduction of fracking and the unprecidented increase in siesmic activity.
So we have established a tight corrolation in time deltas between increased fracking usage and increased siesmicity. We all know that waste injection wells have been around for a while but we haven't had all these earthquakes for that long so what else is there? As it turns out, there isn't a huge difference between a fracked well and a disposal well as far as the structure of the ground beneigh us is concerned. Both push huge volumes of a chemical/water mixture underground at high pressure. In a fracked well, you want to break up that structure and is a disposal well, you don't really care either way so long as the waste goes away. As a matter of fact, both are considered to be the same "class" of well (class II). So lets look at a map of class II wells and see if there is any corolation between the locations of these class II wells and areas seeing this significant increase in earthquakes.
Earthquakes
[Broken External Image]
Wells
Again, one can see a pattern not only in time but in location between the increase of fracking activity and the increase in seismicity.
So you say that "simple geophysics" precludes the idea of fracking induced earthquakes but go on to imply that geology is a complex matter that if we all understood, we would know that fracking didn't cause earthquakes. So there is a bit of a contradiction there. I agree with you that geology is a complex matter that isn't well understood but the simple corolation between increases in fracking and increases in earthquakes is much more clear.
That sounds good except when the prinicple himself says that he is under great pressure from the o/g industry. Professors postulating in the classroom is far different from the industry's perspective than them leading protests at the state capital.
It absolutely benefits them to lie when the truth hurts profits. There is a calculated risk. If I admit that my product is hurting people, then I have a 100% probability of loosing that business. If I lie, redirect, or downplay the significance of my harm, I have a much higher probability of maintaining profitablility. This is not a new thing, tobacco pulled it off for half a century. The oil industry pulled it off for a while in the face of overwhelming evidence that leaded gas was causing health problems. Their calculation is that with enough propaganda and lobbying, they can maintain their profitability from the highly effective process of fracking for decades. When they lawsuits come, they fold the company up into a spinoff, wash their hands, and count their dough (ref Kerr Mcgee/Anadarko).
"THIS IS NOT OUR PROBLEM" is exactly what their saying. And it's easy. They don't have to counter the facts tit for tat. They don't even have to present facts. All the industry has to do is attempt discredit the facts. There is an entire industry of spin doctors and lobbys whose purpose is to present counter arguements, fact-based or otherwise. In that industry, there is a euphemism called F.U.D. That stands for Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. These tools are employed by the o/g industry massively.
Fear - The big government is going to take away our freedoms because they are interfering with our business and damn it, that is unAmerican.
Uncertainty - If we don't keep producing at any cost, the Arabs are going to take over our energy supplies and you will be forced to stand in long lines for gas, drive 55, and be subjected to paying whatever prices they dictate.
Doubt - This science is unvetted. We don't really know what is causing earthquakes. Simple geophysics says that fracking couldn't be responsible but because it's a complex issue, we need more time for the science to develop. While that happens, we will continue our activities.
Credibility and truthfullness have nothing to do with each other. Simple way to split the two is to follow the money. A geologist isn't going to make a or loose another billion regardless of the findings of his research. But the o/g industry will. They can hedge by drawing out the debate for decades while they continue to make huge profits and they are vested in doing so.
Um.... ouch.
I've been pressed for time lately... and I will answer more in depth as time provides. However, you posted images that correlate the correct data (referencing seismic activity to well location). However, your assumption that there is not very much distinction between a class II well and a well which is being hydraulically fractured is absolutely false. The volumes of water are not the same. And certainly not the same when considering return water from the well. The purpose of the an injection well is to store waste water. In fractured well, the purpose is not to store water. It is to fracture the rock matrix to increase permeability. While there is unrecoverable water, to say the difference in the two are negligible is vastly irresponsible.
Your own maps show the correlation quite correctly. Where you see Class II wells, you see increase in seismicity. Whereas the "shale wells" show less to little to no seismicity. The issue is not hydraulic fracturing, the issue is choice of wells to do waste water disposal. And again, in the case the prague swarm, the class II wells in question were predominantly injected with waste water from conventional drilling and completion processes... NOT hydraulic fracturing.
So sure, there is a problem there. There is obviously attention required to the present geology such that injection wells are not selected in which they have the potential to change stress profiles in existing faults. But to state that Oklahoma's earthquakes are in some way a by-product of hydraulic fracturing is largely ignorant.
For the above; in case you haven't looked it up, a class II well is either: a.) and injection well associated with pressure maintenance of a reservoir, b.) waste water disposal c.) hydrocarbon storage. The only class II well that could be associated with hydraulic fracturing is (b), waste water, which waste water is not exclusive to fracturing. ( see reference about prague swarm ).
For your statements, enlighten me with published data that states a class II well and a fractured well (during any stage, drilling to production) are in any way similar in stress profiles on rock matrix and/or otherwise. I want to see PUBLISHED data... feel free to use any source. I am asking, because I am not quite sure where your correlation is coming from.
Again, your maps only further prove my point.
Yes, I stated that geophysics is complex. That, however, does not negate the fact that seismicity create during the hydraulic fracture process is largely negligible and "unfelt" at the surface. Again, to illustrate this I would literally have to make a long presentation involving failure envelopes of rock matric... pressure from the fracturing process... and how the latter affects the first. If you want to know more than that, I strongly suggest taking a geophysics course with a prep in strengths and materials.
As far as the postulation of faculty at a research institution, not quite sure what "leading protests" has to do with anything. Guess I am not sure what point you are trying to make there.
As for your analysis of mitigation, we will just agree to disagree. As far as the companies I have had to work with (as a check), I have been met with the utmost concern for the environment and landowners. "Their calculation is that with enough propaganda and lobbying, they can maintain their profitability from the highly effective process of fracking for decades." This is an incompletely thought... need clarification on the point you are making.
"THIS IS NOT OUR PROBLEM" I need a link to any producer that is saying this. Not saying you are wrong, I just need to see who is saying it before I answer.
From what I read, and understand, what I see is "Corporations are evil and only out for themselves, therefor, everything they say must be a lie and anyone that agrees with them must have been bought out."
If that is what you are basing your "science" on, well... good for you.
∆∆∆ Finally, people are beginning to admit the waste injection wells are the culprit.
Even the OGS and the CC are slowly edging toward admitting it privately, they just won't say so publicly because of the pressure exerted on them by the Oil and NG lobby.
There don't seem to be any professional lobbyists at the capitol representing the property owners though.
People with property damage or just tired of having their children wake up at night to a shaking house are their own lobbyists but they don't seem to get their own seat at the table at the CC or a private meeting with the president of OU and the head of the OGS.
Money and lobbyists run this state so I don't expect to see this problem fixed until we have a temblor exceeding the 5.6 back in 2011.
That is exactly what the USGS is predicting too. A 6.x earthquake that creates significant and widespread property damage along with personal injuries.
Instead of some kind of reasonable regulation of where injection wells are allowed, we get house and senate legislation to eliminate municipal and local control over drilling and give that local authority to the CC.
I guess we know who the CC works for.
The personal injury lawsuits have started though.
Even the OGS and the CC are slowly edging toward admitting it privately, they just won't say so publicly because of the pressure exerted on them by the Oil and NG lobby.
There don't seem to be any professional lobbyists at the capitol representing the property owners though.
People with property damage or just tired of having their children wake up at night to a shaking house are their own lobbyists but they don't seem to get their own seat at the table at the CC or a private meeting with the president of OU and the head of the OGS.
Money and lobbyists run this state so I don't expect to see this problem fixed until we have a temblor exceeding the 5.6 back in 2011.
That is exactly what the USGS is predicting too. A 6.x earthquake that creates significant and widespread property damage along with personal injuries.
Instead of some kind of reasonable regulation of where injection wells are allowed, we get house and senate legislation to eliminate municipal and local control over drilling and give that local authority to the CC.
I guess we know who the CC works for.
The personal injury lawsuits have started though.
Similar threads
